The Metaverse – PPLI and EWP – Episode 2

Posted on by

EWP with PPLI: Delivering the Ultimate Wealth Planning Strategy Available Today

An EWP Asset Structure Is a True Transformative Metaverse

In Episode One in our Metaverse Series we contrasted the popular vision of the metaverse as an alternate computer-generated world with our own version of the metaverse–an EWP Asset Structure that transforms your assets into a reality where they are maximized for tax efficiency, privacy and asset protection. We compared this to the metamorphosis of a caterpillar into a butterfly.

Here we are witnessing one of nature’s most amazing events (video of a caterpillar changing into a butterfly). This transformation is what occurs when we place your assets inside a Private Placement Life Insurance policy. After this transformation your assets will embody the Six Principles of EWP that Wikipedia features in its article on International Tax Planning. Like the butterfly your assets will now be freed from their former constraint, and can now fly with enhanced privacy, asset protection, and tax efficiency. We achieve our remarkable results through our knowledge of asset structuring, as expressed in our team of Regional Representatives.

We now invite you to continue our Journey Together, and see first-hand why an EWP Asset Structure is the most comprehensive, safe, and straightforward asset structure available today.

We continue to bring you examples of how the metaverse is being used today. This week our example is from the world of luxury-goods companies courtesy of the Wall Street Journal. Here are my key excerpts from an article by Trefor Moss.

A $300,000 Dolce & Gabbana Tiara You

Can Only Wear in the Metaverse

Dolce & Gabbana, Gucci, Burberry and other

Luxury-goods companies see promise in digital markets

Where—just as in real life—rarity and exclusivity can

Translate into high prices.

LONDON—Digital sharks wearing Burberry. A virtual Gucci purse that cost more than its real-life equivalent. A one-of-a-kind electronic Dolce & Gabbana tiara that fetched over $300,000 at auction.

The world’s biggest luxury brands have been dipping their toes into the world of digital fashion, and the early evidence suggests there are eager buyers willing to pay premium prices for virtual products.

Upstarts are diving in, too. In February, Cult & Rain, a New York-based sneaker maker, sold 1,179 pairs of real shoes, each paired with a digital version in the form of a NFT, or nonfungible token, and priced at 0.5 ethereum, equivalent to about $1,635.

The combination was a bet on two groups of consumers: sneaker enthusiasts and NFT speculators, according to George Yang, the company’s founder. He wasn’t sure either would show up to buy.

“This was completely untested,” said Mr. Yang, who was hoping for 800 sales to break even. “We didn’t know if we would sell even one of these things,” he said.

The digital luxury market is in its very early days, analysts say. But if companies figure out how to engage a new generation of consumers, annual digital sales could eventually come to as much as 50 billion euros, equivalent to about $55.2 billion, by 2030, according to Morgan Stanley. That would represent a 10th of all projected luxury revenues for the industry by then.

“You’ve got millions of the next generation of luxury consumers spending several hours a day on gaming platforms, so we think there is an opportunity,” said Anita Balchandani, a U.K. partner at McKinsey & Co.’s luxury group.

Cult & Rain’s Proof of Concept

Cult & Rain’s Mr. Yang—a former design director for Paris-based fashion house Cerruti and an avid sneaker collector—had originally planned to develop a conventional luxury sneaker brand. After discovering that some of the sneakers in his personal $150,000 collection were fakes, he set out to make sneakers that contained a microchip guaranteeing authenticity.

As the metaverse emerged, that idea acquired a virtual dimension, he said, since NFT shoes created on the blockchain are inherently unique and traceable.

Last year, Mr. Yang designed the brand’s first sneaker range and hired artists to create one-off stylistic variations to make them unique and collectible. He set up a factory in Milan to make the sneakers. He also began building an online Cult & Rain community, now several thousand strong, on group chatting platform Discord, where NFT buyers congregate to discuss the merits of different projects.

But as he prepared for February’s launch, Mr. Yang said he had no idea whether buyers would come chiefly for the sneakers, or the NFTs—or not come at all.

“This was always going to be proof of concept,” Mr. Yang said.

The sale earned Mr. Yang’s company 859.5 ethereum, the equivalent of roughly $2.7 million, he said.

For serial NFT investor Felix Nordén, an applied scientist at Twitch Interactive Inc., a video-streaming service owned by Amazon.com Inc., Cult & Rain’s actual sneakers were an afterthought: He bought chiefly as a digital investment. The real shoes might make a nice gift for a friend, Sweden-based Mr. Nordén said.

Cult & Rain is planning another launch this month.
In addition to the cash raised in its initial sale, the company, as is typical, receives a 5% royalty whenever one of its NFTs is traded on a public platform such as OpenSea, which is currently the main site for buying and selling NFTs. Most importantly, the launch has demonstrated to luxury companies that it’s feasible “to bridge a real-world luxury item into the NFT space,” Mr. Yang said.

In our next video, Episode Three, you will find out the secret to why an EWP Asset Structure is so successful at delivering the ultimate wealth planning strategy available today.

Please watch our FIRST NFT COLLECTION

by Michael Malloy, CLU TEP RFC.
CEO, Founder @EWP Financial

The Metaverse – PPLI and EWP – Episode 1

Posted on by

The Expanded Worldwide Planning Video Series

Our Journey Together: An Exceptional World of Asset Structuring – Episode One

Beyond Facebook and Apple’s Metaverse with PPLI and EWP

Welcome. The metaverse envisioned by companies like Facebook and Apple entails an augmented, virtual reality where users are not just scrolling, posting, and commenting, but interacting in a fully-realized computer-generated world. This type of metaverse is being defined today, but the final outcome is something nobody knows.

The transformative metaverse that an EWP Asset Structure creates for your assets is analogous to one of nature’s most miraculous events: the transformation of a caterpillar into a butterfly. Once your assets are placed into a properly designed EWP Asset Structure, they are shielded from taxation, while simultaneously achieving maximum privacy and asset protection. A stunning financial transformation indeed!

The caterpillar world that your assets previously occupied has been freed into the new reality of the butterfly. Your assets remain the same. What these same assets can achieve for you has been fundamentally altered.

This type of financial metaverse has been in existence in various forms since the 1980s. You don’t have to wait for it to define itself. An EWP Asset Structure creates a new reality for your assets by using a simple and straightforward financial tool–life insurance, in the form of Private Placement Life Insurance, or PPLI for short.

This series of videos introduces you to the Metaverse of EWP Asset Structures and how you can use them to achieve maximum tax efficiency, privacy and asset protection.

As the Forbes article below states, some are calling 2022 the year of the metaverse. With this in mind, we bring you an example of how high-end real estate is working with the metaverse.

ONE Sotheby’s Is Selling The First Real-World Home Through The Metaverse Using NFT Technology

Emma Reynolds,Senior Contributor

I cover home design and luxury real estate.

Some might argue that 2022 is the year of the metaverse, and specifically, metaverse real estate.

Together, ONE Sotheby’s International Realty and Voxel Architects, along with general contractor and NFT collector Gabe Sierra, are introducing the first ever ‘MetaReal’ mansion that includes a real-world home and a virtual counterpart in the metaverse. The virtual home will live within The Sandbox metaverse, a community-driven platform where creators can monetize voxel assets on the blockchain.

The buyer of the NFT asset will also acquire ownership rights of the physical home, set to be completed in Miami in Q4 of 2022. This is the first time something like this has been done.

The home in Miami will be built on a one-acre lot in one of the city’s most prestigious neighborhoods. It will span 11,000 square feet and include seven bedrooms and nine bathrooms. The virtual property will exactly mirror this, and Voxel Architects is helping to create it. The ‘MetaReal’ Mansion will be auctioned off in 2022 at a yet-to-be disclosed reserve price. The exclusive sales agent for the property is Michael Martinez of ONE Sotheby’s, who plans to execute the transaction on the Ethereum blockchain.

“The metaverse counterpart of the home will serve as an extension of the real-world home, allowing the buyer to host in-home meetings, events and parties with guests from around the world,” Meta Residence founder Gabe Sierra tells Forbes. “By mimicking the real-world environment of the buyer, we are creating an experience that blends the lines between metaverse and reality. Imagine fighting off a dragon, traversing over a mountain range, and finally arriving at your metaverse property, where you are greeted by your friends who are visiting to check out your new Bored Ape NFT. After interacting in your virtual living room, you exit the metaverse, and you are now sitting inside that same real-world house. That is the experience we are creating.”

NFTs as they pertain to real estate are relatively new, and for those who have a hard time making sense of the concept, you’re not alone. In short, the metaverse is a virtual world and there are more than one. Facebook, for example, hopes to be the largest. The tech company changed its name to Meta earlier this year.

Please watch our FIRST NFT COLLECTION

by Michael Malloy, CLU TEP RFC.
CEO, Founder @EWP Financial

CRYPTO – PPLI and EWP – Episode 4 – The EWP Stories Video Series

Posted on by

Cryptocurrency, Private Placement Life Insurance and Expanded Worldwide Planning

The Expanded Worldwide Planning Stories Video Series

Episode 4

Introduction

Welcome. Many investors in the crypto space have lost faith in some of our long-established institutions. These investors are looking for relevance in newer and more decentralized modes like the blockchain concept. At EWP Financial we embrace the six principles of Expanded Worldwide Planning, or EWP for short. These six principles are introduced in the opening paragraph of Wikipedia’s article on International Tax Planning.

This video will explain the six principles of EWP and how they help to safeguard your crypto assets and maximize them for tax efficiency, asset protection and privacy. A properly designed EWP Asset Structure can give you what no other asset structure can offer. These six principles are the key to the relevance you are searching for in your quest for financial security.

We include excerpts from an excellent article from Cointelegraph by Robert W. Wood that discusses some of the tax aspects of cryptocurrency.

——————————————————————————————————————————-

The major tax myths about cryptocurrency debunked

By Robert W. Wood
More crypto tax enforcement is coming, and many taxpayers are complying going forward, and amending prior returns if they have something to clean up.

Crypto and taxes may not be a match made in heaven, but taxes seem inevitable, and the United States Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has made it clear it is going after people who don’t report. With IRS summonses to Coinbase, Kraken, Circle and Poloniex, plus other enforcement efforts, the IRS is on the hunt. The IRS sent 10,000 letters in different versions asking for compliance, but all were nudges to encourage taxpayers to be compliant.

The IRS hunt for crypto has often been compared to the IRS hunt for foreign accounts more than a decade ago. Unfortunately, it is not clear if there will ever be a crypto amnesty program emulating the offshore voluntary disclosure programs the IRS formulated for offshore accounts.

The IRS made its first big announcement about crypto in Notice 2014-21, classifying it as property. That has big tax consequences, accentuated by wild price swings. Selling crypto can trigger gain or loss and be taxable. But even buying something with crypto can trigger taxes. Paying employees or contractors does too. Even paying taxes in crypto can trigger more taxes.

We are already seeing crypto audits by the IRS, and by some states (notably California’s Franchise Tax Board), and more are sure to follow. At least now, there are tracking and tax return preparation alternatives that can make the process easier than it was in the early days. Everyone is trying to minimize taxable crypto gains and to defer taxes where legally possible.

Still, it is easy to get confused about the tax treatment and take tax positions that may be hard to defend if you are caught. With that in mind, here are some things I’ve heard, that I’ll call crypto tax myths.
Myth 1
You can’t owe any tax on cryptocurrency transactions unless you receive an IRS Form 1099. If you did not receive a Form 1099, you can check the box on your tax return that says that you did not have any transactions with cryptocurrency.

Actually: Tax may still be owed, even if the payor or broker does not file a Form 1099. A Form 1099 does not create tax where no tax was previously due, and plenty of taxable income is not reported on Forms 1099. A Form 1099 might be wrong in which case, explain it on your tax return. But if you are audited and your best defense is that you chose not to report your transactions because you did not receive a Form 1099, that is weak.

Myth 2
If you hold your crypto through a private wallet instead of an exchange, you don’t need to report the crypto on your tax returns.

Actually: Private wallet or exchange, the tax rules are the same. The impulse to hide ownership by moving wealth to anonymous holding structures is not new. When Swiss banks began disclosing their U.S. accountholders to the IRS and U.S. Department of Justice, many U.S. taxpayers tried just about everything, but nearly everyone paid in the end, usually with big penalties. The cryptocurrency question on the IRS Form 1040 is not limited to cryptocurrency held through exchanges. If you say “no,” even though you hold crypto through a private wallet, you are potentially making false statements on a tax return signed under penalties of perjury. You might be betting that you will never get caught, but thousands of U.S. taxpayers who have Swiss bank accounts who can attest how poorly that bet can played out.

Myth 3
If you hold your crypto through a trust, LLC or other entity, then you do not owe tax on the crypto transactions and do not have to report. Besides (the myth continues), income generated through LLCs is tax-free.

Actually: Owning crypto through an entity may keep the income off your tax return. But unless the entity qualifies (and is registered) as a tax-exempt entity, the entity itself will likely have tax reporting obligations and may owe taxes. For tax purposes, LLCs are taxed as corporations or partnerships, depending on their facts and tax elections. Single-member LLCs are disregarded, so the LLC income ends up on the sole owner’s return. If your entity is a foreign entity, there are complex U.S. tax rules that can make you directly liable for certain income produced within the foreign entity.

Myth 4
If I structure the sale of my crypto as a loan (or some other non-sale transaction), I don’t have to report the proceeds.

Actually: Consider if you are loaning or selling the crypto. The IRS and courts have robust doctrines to disregard sham transactions. Are you getting the same crypto back that you are loaning? Are you charging interest on the loan, and paying tax on the interest as you receive it? Some loans may not hold water. And if you sell crypto and receive a promissory note, that may complicate your taxes further with installment sale calculations.

Myth 5
A crypto exchange is a type of trust since you can’t unilaterally change the policies of the exchange. So you do not own the crypto in your account for tax purposes and do not have to report transactions through an exchange.

Actually: The IRS has not said any of this. IRS guidance suggests that the IRS views taxpayers as owning the cryptocurrency held through their exchange accounts. It seems highly unlikely that the IRS would view crypto held through an exchange account as owned by the exchange itself (as trustee), rather than owned by the account holder. Taxpayers often own their assets through accounts held by institutions, such as bank accounts, investment accounts, 401(k)s, IRAs, etc.

In most cases, the tax law treats taxpayers as owning the money and assets held through these accounts. Some special accounts like 401(k)s and IRAs have special tax rules. And having an account treated as a trust is not necessarily a good tax result. Beneficiaries of trusts, and particularly foreign trusts, have onerous reporting obligations. Thus, before you consider crypto exchanges as trusts, be careful what you wish for. Calling something a trust does not mean income generated within the trust is exempt from income tax.

Myth 6
Congress’s amendment to Section 1031 of the tax code that limits like-kind exchanges to real property doesn’t make crypto-to-crypto exchanges taxable.

Actually: Section 1001 of the tax code provides that a taxable gain results from the “sale or other disposition of property.” The sale of any type of property for cash or other property can create a taxable gain. The IRS says crypto is property, so trading crypto for other crypto is a sale of crypto for the value of the new crypto.

Before the Section 1031 amendment took effect in 2018, a crypto-for-crypto swap might have been ok as a like-kind exchange under Section 1031. But the IRS is pushing back on this position in tax audits and has issued guidance that denies tax-free treatment for certain cryptocurrency swaps. That is not precedential and does not cover the waterfront, but it tells you what the IRS is thinking. In any case, now that Section 1031 has limited like-kind exchange treatment to real property, crypto-to-crypto swaps are taxable unless they qualify for another exception.

Takeaways
Every taxpayer is entitled to plan their affairs and transactions to try to minimize taxes. But they should be wary of quick fixes and theories that sound too good to be true. The IRS appears to believe that many crypto taxpayers are not complying with the tax law, and being careful in the future and doing some clean-up for the past is worth considering. Be careful out there.

This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice.

The views, thoughts and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.

Robert W. Wood is a tax lawyer representing clients worldwide from the office of Wood LLP in San Francisco, where he is a managing partner. He is the author of numerous tax books and frequently writes about taxes for Forbes, Tax Notes and other publications.

—————————————————————————————————-

Conclusion

EWP Asset Structures are tailored-made for holding crypto and NFT assets. At EWP Financial we welcome you to enter our world of satisfied clients, and find out what our simple and straightforward asset structure can do for you.

Take a look to our first NFT COLLECTION.

If you found this video useful, please give us a Like, and click on the subscribe button below. We look forward to having you as a client. Thank you for watching.

To learn how the wealthiest families in the world conduct their financial affairs, please call +1 530 692 1007, or email us at info@expandedworldwideplanning.com.

At your convenience, we can arrange a call to discuss how our unique blueprint can vastly enhance your asset structure. Contact Us.

Disclaimer

The opinions expressed in this video are for general informational purposes only and are not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual on any financial structure, investment, or insurance product.

by Michael Malloy, CLU TEP RFC.
CEO, Founder @EWP Financial

Tax Shield 3 – Episode 3 – Part 3 – The EWP Stories Video Series

Posted on by

Tax Shield Video 3

The Expanded Worldwide Planning Stories Video Series

International Tax Planning

Introduction

Welcome. For real estate investors, there are very substantial benefits to using an asset structure that embodies the principles of Expanded Worldwide Planning, or EWP for short. This is true for U.S. persons and non-U.S. persons alike. A properly designed EWP structure both eliminates tax on rental income and tax on the sale of real estate. This is a very powerful result.

Our video details the disreputable methods used by Conservation for Nature’s appraiser, Jay Edwards. Jay’s inflated appraisals give investors unwarranted tax deductions, while the pressure to achieve these inflated appraisals exact an unhealthy influence on Jay’s life in the form of his increased consumption of alcohol and cigarettes. Jay also finds himself in trouble with the Department of Justice and the Tennessee state real estate appraiser board.

———————————————————————————————–

Part 3

When Jay Edwards began a land appraisal project, he had a single goal—to produce the highest valuation possible. He had had 30 years to hone his skill of inflating appraisals. When he had done retail appraisals at the height of the refinancing boom in the early part of this century, his services were in high demand.

The promoters at Conservation for Nature, want a high valuation, because that in turn produces a large tax deduction for its investors. On one deal in South Carolina, they had acquired a property of 28 acres for $1M, then raised about $9M from investors who bought the property.

The investors made an easement donation based on a claimed value for what the land would be worth if developed as a multifamily resort. Jay’s appraised projection produced a tax deduction of about $39M. The tax write off for investors: $4.00 for every $1 invested.

Of late, the promoters at Conservation for Nature, were pressing Jay for higher and higher numbers. His increased consumption of cigarettes and alcohol was keeping pace with these higher numbers. A number that was going in the opposite direction were his hours of sound sleep. He could not remember when he had last had a restful night’s sleep.

Jay had become a character in an old joke; the one the Mafia hired. It went like this.

The Mafia needed a new accountant, so they interviewed three people. They asked the first interviewee, “How much is 2 + 2?”

“Four,” he answered.

“Sorry, that’s not right,” said the Mafia boss.

They asked the next candidate, “How much is 2 + 2?”

“Four, of course,” he said.”

“That’s not right,” said the Mafia boss.

They asked the third accountant the same question.

He responded, “What number do you want it to be?”

The Mafia boss said, “You’re hired.”

The joke was now becoming stale. Conservation for Nature was being investigated by the Department of Justice. The Tennessee state real estate appraiser board brought a formal complaint against Jay, after a detailed review of one of his easement appraisals found an inflated valuation riddled with errors and omissions.

Threatened with the loss of his Tennessee license, Jay voluntarily surrendered it instead. However, he continued to work for Conservation for Nature in states where the appraiser for a conservation easement was not required to be licensed by the state, and so continued to ply his disreputable trade.

———————————————————————————————-

Conclusion

In our next video, we find George Allbright at crossroads on whether to do business with Conservation for Nature. George is able to firmly decide against doing business with Conservation for Nature after the appraiser, Jay Edwards, telephones George in a very drunk condition. George knew Jay from college days, and describes him as a guy who would sleep with his best friend’s wife.

If you found this video useful, please give us a Like, and click on the subscribe button below. We look forward to connecting with you in part four of our Tax Shield story. Thank you for watching.

To learn how the wealthiest families in the world conduct their financial affairs, please call +1 530 692 1007, or email us at info@expandedworldwideplanning.com.

At your convenience, we can arrange a call to discuss how our unique blueprint can vastly enhance your asset structure.

Disclaimer

by Michael Malloy, CLU TEP RFC.
CEO, Founder @EWP Financial

CRYPTO – PPLI and EWP – Episode 3 – The EWP Stories Video Series

Posted on by

Cryptocurrency, Private Placement Life Insurance and Expanded Worldwide Planning

Episode 3

The Expanded Worldwide Planning Video Stories

Introduction

Welcome. Since you have invested in crypto coins and/or tokens you are familiar with the blockchain concept. You are at the forefront of a worldwide, game changing movement, which lately has morphed into NFTs and the metaverse. Throughout the world governments are struggling to define crypto assets. Different governments throughout the world define crypto assets in terms of traditional assets like money, property, a commodity, or an unregulated asset class.

Please take a look to our first NFT COLLECTION

Recently the United States has subjected crypto assets to what some have called the draconian reporting requirements for cash transactions with severe penalties for violations. In our written article, we have excerpts from an article by Simon Chandler of Cointelegraph which details how governments worldwide are working with the classification of crypto assets.

In the first two videos in our crypto asset series, we introduced you to our firm, EWP Financial. This video focuses on three important questions that our most sophisticated investors ask us.

These three questions pertain to any asset class, and they are very pertinent to crypto assets. It is our hope that the answers to these questions will give you the assurance you need to place your own holdings into this simple, straightforward, and very powerful asset structure, an EWP Asset Structure.

—————————————————————————————————

Excerpts from Cointelegraph Article

Money or Assets? How World Governments Define Cryptocurrencies

The world’s governments want to see cryptocurrencies as everything but what they really are.

By Simon Chandler
Cryptocurrencies — what are they? Money? Commodities? Securities? Utility tokens? Or something else? Few national governments seem to be in any kind of agreement on this question, and for now, at least, their divisions have given such currencies as Bitcoin and Ethereum a floating, indeterminate status on the global stage.

As a result, cryptocurrencies lack a single, definite existence, with some nations treating them as money (e.g., Japan, Germany) and others treating them as an unregulated, speculative asset (e.g., Mexico, Denmark), making them the financial equivalent of Schrödinger’s cat. However, as this review of classifications of crypto throughout the world will show, cryptocurrencies are all these things and more, which is why they deserve to be classified by future legislation according their own, unique qualities.

United States: securities, commodities, property, money

As an indication of how difficult it may be for world governments to ever reach a global consensus on the status of cryptocurrencies, it’s worth pointing out that there’s currently little consensus within nations — let alone among them. This is nowhere more evident than in the United States, where five separate agencies have all had their own competing classifications of cryptocurrencies.

First up is the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which — up until June — defined cryptocurrencies in general as securities, meaning assets in which someone invests in the expectation of receiving a return. In March, for example, it issued a public statement indicating that it would regulate anything being traded via an exchange platform as a security.

“A number of these platforms provide a mechanism for trading assets that meet the definition of a ‘security’ under the federal securities laws. If a platform offers trading of digital assets that are securities and operates as an ‘exchange,’ as defined by the federal securities laws, then the platform must register with the SEC as a national securities exchange or be exempt from registration.”

Bitcoin declined by 10 percent following this announcement, yet the statements of other American authorities and agencies differ with the SEC’s assertion that cryptocurrencies are securities. Because, also in March, a New York federal judge ruled that the Commodities and Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) can regulate BTC and other currencies as commodities, putting them on the same level as gold, oil and coffee.

If this wasn’t already confusing enough, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has defined cryptocurrencies as taxable property since March 2014, when it declared:

“For federal tax purposes, virtual currency is treated as property.”

Observers would be forgiven for supposing that three separate definitions were enough, yet two additional agencies treat cryptocurrencies as money. The U.S. Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) is the bureau of the U.S. Treasury Department responsible for enforcing economic sanctions, which can include sanctions against certain cryptocurrencies (e.g., the Petro). In April, it announced that it would be treating “virtual currencies” in the same way as fiat currency, making any individual who handled a cryptocurrency covered by an economic sanction liable for prosecution.

Canada, Mexico and South America: commodities, virtual assets, legal tender

Like the U.S., Canada doesn’t regard cryptocurrencies as legal tender. However, its approach to virtual currencies is slightly more unified, with the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) currently defining them as commodities — a definition which would appear to apply in general throughout most government agencies.

In Mexico, the emphasis is also on cryptocurrencies as commodities. On March 1, the government passed the Law to Regulate Financial Technology Companies, which includes a section on “virtual assets,” — aka cryptocurrencies.

Travelling farther south, the picture is mixed. In Venezuela, the government (in)famously announced the oil-backed Petro in December, and in April, it decreed that the cryptocurrency must become legal tender for all financial transactions involving government ministries.

While classifications of one kind or another generally apply in the above American nations, cryptocurrencies suffer from a partial non-existence in others. In Brazil, the Securities and Exchange Commission (CVM) declared in January that cryptocurrencies cannot legally be classed as financial assets, despite the fact that the Brazilian Revenue Office had previously stipulated in 2017 that they’re to be regarded as such for tax purposes. In Chile, cryptocurrencies are neither securities nor money, although the central bank has recently begun considering specific regulation.

And in Colombia, the Financial Superintendent has also declared that digital currencies don’t count as money or securities, while, for tax purposes, it can be considered a ‘high-risk investment.’

While South America often takes a restrictive stance toward cryptocurrencies, some nations within the continent are slightly more accepting. In Argentina, cryptocurrencies aren’t legal tender and they don’t have any regulation specifically applied to them. That said, they are treated as goods under the terms of the nation’s Civil Code, while a December update to tax regulation classifies them as income derived from shares and securities.

What such variations indicate is that, when it comes to the classification of cryptocurrencies, the economic and political situations of the nations concerned make a difference. The inherent abstractness of cryptocurrencies makes them adaptable in terms of their function, so their particular classification and usage all depends on the political and economic conditions prevailing in a particular nation, and what that nation wants to use them for. This is why, in countries where the national currency and economy are relatively weak — or where freedoms are restricted — cryptocurrencies tend to be denied legal status.

Europe: private money, units of account, contractual means of exchange, transferable value

This tendency becomes more apparent when the status of cryptocurrencies in Latin America is compared with their status in Europe. In Germany, the continent’s biggest economy, Bitcoin has been recognized as “private money” since April 2014.

In the U.K., cryptocurrencies have generally been left undisturbed by regulation, and what’s interesting to note is that the government has recognized that comparing them to pre-existing currencies, commodities, securities or any other financial instrument would be inaccurate. In 2014, its HM Revenue & Customs department wrote:

“Cryptocurrencies have a unique identity and cannot therefore be directly compared to any other form of investment activity or payment mechanism.”

Across the English Channel, France has also held off applying any specific regulation to cryptocurrencies, although it has been making concerted efforts with Germany to propose laws that would be international in scope.

In the Netherlands, the central bank also denies the currency status of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies, having written in a January position paper:

“We do not consider cryptos as money.”

In contrast, a Dutch court ruled in March that Bitcoin can be considered a “transferable value,” making it equivalent to property. This bears some resemblance to a definition being worked on by the Italian Ministry of Economy and Finance in a draft decree, which describes cryptocurrencies as a “digital representation of value […] used as a tool of exchange for purchasing goods or services.”

Beyond the EU, Switzerland is perhaps the most significant European nation when it comes to crypto, not least because it has aggressively positioned itself as a desirable place for crypto traders and businesses. In 2014, its federal government published a report in which cryptocurrencies were defined as assets, rather than as currencies or a means of payment. But since then, the landlocked nation has introduced several “regulatory simplifications” in order to attract fintech companies, and it’s in this climate that new approaches to cryptocurrencies have emerged. In November 2017, the regional district of Zug began accepting Ethereum and Bitcoin as payment for administration costs and municipal services, effectively recognizing both as money. It was soon followed by the city of Chiasso (in Ticino), which announced in February that it would start accepting Bitcoin as payment for tax on amounts up to 250 Swiss francs.

Such examples from Europe offer two major takeaways. The first is that EU (and non-EU) nations — much like the U.S. and Canada — are holding back on specific crypto-focused regulation, thereby giving cryptocurrencies the space and time to solidify into definite, stable forms. As such, nations are reluctant to attribute any single ‘definition’ or ‘status’ to digital currencies. Correspondingly, the current application of numerous different categorizations is merely the result of attempts to apply any relevant pre-existing laws that, in lieu of specific legislation, might curb abuses of crypto. These categorizations are stop-gaps and shouldn’t generally be taken for what certain nations or governments ‘really think’ about crypto.

But secondly, even though many European states are gearing toward the announcement of bespoke cryptocurrency legislation, it would seem unlikely that many will advance so far as to actually recognize Bitcoin, Ethereum or any other major coin as legal tender. With the notable exceptions of Switzerland and Germany, the majority of European states deny that cryptocurrencies are money and given how jealously governments and central banks tend to guard their financial powers, it’s unlikely they’ll shift from this stance anytime soon.

China and East Asia

Jealousy is particularly acute in China. In December 2013, the Chinese government issued a notice proclaiming that Bitcoin is not a currency.

“In terms of nature, Bitcoin is a specific virtual commodity that does not have the legal status equivalent to currency and cannot and should not be used as currency in the market.”

Nonetheless, the same notice also acknowledged that “[Bitcoin] transactions act as a way of buying and selling goods on the internet,” and given that it made no attempt to prohibit or discourage such activity, it’s arguable that the announcement acted as a tacit recognition of cryptocurrencies as a means of payment (i.e., as money).

Unfortunately, the Chinese government’s position has hardened considerably since 2013. It banned ICOs in September 2017, while it also prohibited crypto exchanges that same month and later blocked foreign exchanges, citing “financial risks” as its motivation for both acts. In other words, it effectively denied that cryptocurrencies are legitimate securities, assets or commodities in China, just as it had denied their status as currency four years previously. And given that it has also been taking steps to make mining more difficult this year, the current political and regulatory climate in China is now denying cryptocurrency any kind of official status.

Things aren’t so gloomy for crypto elsewhere in Asia. In Japan, the government has gone through an opposite process to China’s, classing Bitcoin as “not currency” in 2014 and then correcting its position in March 2016, when the Payment Services Act finally recognized cryptocurrencies as money. However, as an indication of the uniqueness of crypto, the actual definition included in the act described cryptocurrency more specifically as a “property value” that can be used to buy goods and services, rather than as a currency.

Over in South Korea, cryptocurrencies are recognized as an “asset with measurable value,” a verdict furnished by the nation’s supreme court on May 30. It is consistent with the regulation and guidelines issued by South Korean authorities to date.

In Singapore, the government is also inclined to view cryptocurrencies as assets rather than money. In August 2017, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) warned ICOs and crypto exchanges that it has jurisdiction over those tokens falling under the definition of securities, a warning it repeated in September and also this May to eight exchanges that hadn’t yet registered with it.

Unique identity

Again, what such stances underline is that most developed nations are cautiously open to cryptocurrencies as a new financial instrument, as a new means of generating income and raising capital and as the basis of a new technology — i.e., blockchain. However, it’s clear that few currently want to recognize Bitcoin or any other decentralized coin as money, especially if their governments happen to be more authoritarian. This reluctance is particularly evident in certain examples we’ve skipped over: In Russia, cryptocurrencies are “not a legal method of payment” but rather property, while the government in Turkey has previously stated that Bitcoin is “not considered as electronic money” under current law and isn’t compatible with Islam.

Because most governments are still unsure of how cryptocurrencies will develop in the future, and possibly because they don’t want to recognize the radical implications of decentralized money, they’ve shied away from establishing a distinct legal identity for cryptos. Instead, many have attempted to apply whatever relevant pre-existing laws they can, in the hope that this will curb those effects of cryptocurrencies that may be undesirable from the perspective of a national government. This is why, on an international level, cryptocurrencies have been swamped by a flood of miscellaneous categorizations, from private money to property and ‘transferable value.’

On the other hand, the variation in classifications is also a product of the versatility of cryptocurrencies. Because they generally aren’t issued and control by a central body, there are few restraints on how they can be used. Some holders may therefore use them as a means of payment, others may treat them as a speculative financial instrument or as property, while the future could bring yet even more functions. This adjustability to the needs of holders is one of crypto’s defining characteristics, which is why the U.K. government was probably right to say in 2014 that cryptocurrencies have a “unique identity.” And it’s also why, when the world’s governments finally get around to introducing specific legislation for cryptocurrencies, they’d be well advised not to attempt to subsume them entirely under existing legal categories.

—————————————————————————————————-

Conclusion

In our next video we explore in depth the Six Principles of EWP, and why Wikipedia discusses them in their article on International Tax Planning. These Six Principles are at the core of any properly designed EWP asset structure, and explain why Private Placement Life Insurance is best suited to protect your crypto assets from evasive government regulation and taxation.

If you found this video useful please give us a Like, and click on the Subscribe button. We look forward to connecting with you in Episode Four in our Crypto Series.

To learn how the wealthiest families in the world conduct their financial affairs, please call +1 530 692 1007, or email us at info@expandedworldwideplanning.com.

At your convenience, we can arrange a call to discuss how our unique blueprint can vastly enhance your asset structure.

Disclaimer

by Michael Malloy, CLU TEP RFC.
CEO, Founder @EWP Financial

Tax Shield 2 – Episode 2 – Part 3 – The EWP Stories Video Series

Posted on by

The Expanded Worldwide Planning Stories Video Series – Part 3 – Episode 2 – Tax Shield 2

Watch Tax Shield Episode 1

Introduction

Welcome. Oddly enough many of the tax benefits used in the sophisticated designs of Expanded Worldwide Planning, or EWP for short, are common to most life insurance policies. These tax benefits are:

Tax-deferred growth of the cash value
No capital gains tax
No income tax
The ability to access the cash value through tax-free loans, and
A tax-free death benefit

In this video we meet Jack Newcastle, an attorney at the IRS. Jack is in the midst of auditing the very company that George Allbright is considering for his conservation easement. Jack’s nickname is ‘Jack the Shark.’ We learn how he earned this nickname, and why he has his current position at the IRS.

—————————————————————————————————-

Jack Newcastle pursued his position as a lawyer at the IRS’s Global High Wealth Group with zeal. Many of his colleagues would call Jack a zealot. He was an unabashed crusader against abusive tax schemes.

What was not so common knowledge was that his grandfather’s law firm was destroyed for backing one of these abusive tax schemes. Because of this, the life of a rich, successful partner at a major law firm was denied to Jack. Jack sought revenge on those who had robbed him of his prestigious partner position. His nickname was ‘Jack the shark.’

Jack was walking down H Street, heading towards the Treasury Building. His mind felt dull, far from the clear, scientific thinking required to succeed on his current audit case. The Baroque grandeur of the city plan of Washington D.C. was lost to him.

Jack was lost in thought about the latest developments at the office. He was part of the Global High Wealth Group audit team that was undertaking an audit of Conservation for Nature, the company that had contacted George Allbright about the purchase of his land.

Things were not going well on this audit. The promoters of this syndicated conservation easement scheme were successfully bending the law to their advantage at every turn.

A conservation easement, in its original, legitimate form, is granted when a landowner permanently protects pristine land from development. In that scenario, the public enjoys the benefit of undeveloped land and the taxpayer gets a tax deduction.

By contrast, these promoters were finding appraisers willing to declare that land parcels purchased by the promoters have extraordinary development value, and thus were worth many times the purchase price. They then were selling stakes in the deal to wealthy investors who receive tax deductions that are often five or more times what they put in.

The Global High Wealth Group was introduced with the aim of stopping just this type of unscrupulous promotors. Unfortunately for the IRS, the Global High Wealth Group was not working as expected: with bureaucratic end-fighting and being woefully underfunded, the initial euphoria at its launching was short lived. They also had experienced no steady leadership with three different directors in the past five years.

At the beginning of the audit, the promoters seemed easy targets. But as they progressed with the audit, they realized that they were dealing with more savvy characters.

All this brought Jack to his office in a sour mood.

Jack’s cell phone rang. It was not a number he knew, but answered anyway, “Hello.”

“Jack is that you,” said a strangely familiar voice.
“Yes.”
“This is George.”
“Man, it’s been a while.”

George telephoned Jack because he remembered that he had taken a position at the IRS, and he might know something about Conservation for Nature. After a few minutes of catching up, George asked him about Conservation for Nature, and was told about Jack’s ongoing audit.

They agreed to speak the following day, as Jack had reached the Treasury Building, and needed to go into his office.

George felt the pleasure of connecting with an old friend, but he knew the story of Jack’s grandfather, and how bitter Jack was at having to accept a position at the IRS. Jack gave only negative comments about Conservation for Nature. Could Jack be trusted? Would his advice be tainted by his personal history?

—————————————————————————————————-

Conclusion

Our next video, reveals how Conservation for Nature achieves their inflated tax deductions. You will find out the very person who is most responsible for these inflated deductions, Jay Edwards. Jay is being pushed for larger and larger tax deductions at the cost of both his career and his health.

If you found this video useful, please give us a Like, and click on the Subscribe button below. We look forward to connecting with you in Part Three of our Tax Shield story.

To learn how the wealthiest families in the world conduct their financial affairs, please call +1 530 692 1007, or email us at info@expandedworldwideplanning.com.

At your convenience, we can arrange a call to discuss how our unique blueprint can vastly enhance your asset structure.

Disclaimer

by Michael Malloy, CLU TEP RFC.
CEO, Founder @EWP Financial

CRYPTO – PPLI and EWP – Episode 2 – The EWP Stories Video Series

Posted on by

Cryptocurrency, Private Placement Life Insurance and Expanded Worldwide Planning

The EWP Stories Video Series

Video 2

Introduction

Welcome. In our first video of our series on crypto currencies we introduced you to our firm EWP Financial. In this video we continue with this topic, but first an important point: if you are new to asset structuring, you are probably thinking, well, EWP Financial seems like a good firm with plenty of experience, but what is EWP Financial going to do for my crypto currency? Why should I put my crypto into this type of asset structure?

The answer is simple. In a properly designed EWP asset structure, once your crypto is inside the structure, you will no longer pay any taxes on your holdings, and your reporting requirements will become minimal. This is very powerful. Below are excerpts from an excellent recent article by Robert W. Wood from Cointelegraph which discusses crypto tax reporting requirements. The author’s Six Crypto Tax Myths are listed, and to receive his answers please go to the full article.

What do you have to give up to achieve this result? The answer is very little? A small change in how your holdings are titled, and some changes to give you a more diversified portfolio.

What fees will I have to pay to achieve this outstanding result? The answer is very minimal fees. Usually about 1% of your crypto holdings annually.

Now more valuable information on EWP Financial, and how you can become one of our very satisfied clients in wherever country you might reside. We continue with our theme of financial architecture.

—————————————————————————————————-

The major tax myths about cryptocurrency debunked

By Robert W. Wood

More crypto tax enforcement is coming, and many taxpayers are complying going forward, and amending prior returns if they have something to clean up.

Myth 1

You can’t owe any tax on cryptocurrency transactions unless you receive an IRS Form 1099. If you did not receive a Form 1099, you can check the box on your tax return that says that you did not have any transactions with cryptocurrency.

Myth 2

If you hold your crypto through a private wallet instead of an exchange, you don’t need to report the crypto on your tax returns.

Myth 3

If you hold your crypto through a trust, LLC or other entity, then you do not owe tax on the crypto transactions and do not have to report. Besides (the myth continues), income generated through LLCs is tax-free.

Myth 4

If I structure the sale of my crypto as a loan (or some other non-sale transaction), I don’t have to report the proceeds.

Myth 5

A crypto exchange is a type of trust since you can’t unilaterally change the policies of the exchange. So you do not own the crypto in your account for tax purposes and do not have to report transactions through an exchange.

Myth 6

Congress’s amendment to Section 1031 of the tax code that limits like-kind exchanges to real property doesn’t make crypto-to-crypto exchanges taxable.

Takeaways

Every taxpayer is entitled to plan their affairs and transactions to try to minimize taxes. But they should be wary of quick fixes and theories that sound too good to be true. The IRS appears to believe that many crypto taxpayers are not complying with the tax law, and being careful in the future and doing some clean-up for the past is worth considering. Be careful out there.

This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice.

The views, thoughts and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.

Robert W. Wood is a tax lawyer representing clients worldwide from the office of Wood LLP in San Francisco, where he is a managing partner. He is the author of numerous tax books and frequently writes about taxes for Forbes, Tax Notes and other publications.

—————————————————————————————————-

Conclusion

In our next video, we answer three important questions that are most sophisticated clients ask us:

Is it legal?

Can they steal my money?

Will I be audited?

The answers to these questions will surprise you, so stay tuned, and thanks for watching.

If you found this video useful, please give us a like, and click on the subscribe button below. We look forward to connecting with you in Episode 3 of our crypto series

To learn how the wealthiest families in the world conduct their financial affairs, please call +1 530 692 1007, or email us at info@expandedworldwideplanning.com.

At your convenience, we can arrange a call to discuss how our unique blueprint can vastly enhance your asset structure.

Disclaimer

by Michael Malloy, CLU TEP RFC.
CEO, Founder @EWP Financial

The Expanded Worldwide Planning Stories Video Series – Part 3 – Episode 1 – Tax Shield 1

Posted on by

Tax Shield 1 – Episode 1 – Part 3 – The EWP Stories Video Series

Introduction
Welcome. Why strain to invent an asset structure that will very likely draw the attention of tax authorities, because of its convoluted and aggressive design? Why not use a financial tool that has been in use since Ancient Rome–life insurance? This will give you the best tax shield available today bar none.
Our story involves the failed attempt of George Allbright to use a conservation easement that produces an inflated tax deduction. George discovers when it’s almost too late why it’s important to use a firmly established asset structure rather than one that will just get you in trouble with the IRS.

George Allbright was skimming over the arid, parched landscape of New Mexico in his Eurocopter Mercedes-Benz EC-145. This stylishly, well-appointed helicopter, costing $7 million dollars. It could maneuver effortlessly between the narrow red-rock canyons near his home. but minutes from his home were some of the poorest tribal communities of the Navajo Nation.

Some of these communities have been compared to Third World countries because of their economic struggles and their lack of basic modern water and energy systems. Most of the state’s Pueblo villages, Navajo chapter houses and Apache communities are isolated and have little or no access to the already poor infrastructure in New Mexico.

George’s source of great wealth was also a product of sharp contrasts. He was a non-smoker who founded a chain of stores that sold cheap cigarettes. He was raised in a large city, Detroit, yet now was one of the largest landowners in the U.S. He used his prodigious capital from the sale of his cheap cigarette stores to purchase ranches across the United States.

George skillfully landed his helicopter on the helipad a short distance from his split-level modern home that was cut out of a cliff overlooking acres of pristine desert landscape. He had no neighbors in sight, and he liked it that way.

After his flight, he sat on his veranda overlooking the silent and serene desert, dotted with creosote and mesquite. He savored his favorite single malt scotch, Laphroaig, with its strong peaty taste.

His cell phone vibrated loudly on the glass table. It was a number he didn’t recognize.

“Hello,” said George.

“Good afternoon,” said a well educated voice. “Let me get straight to the point. We haven’t met, but my company, Conservation for Nature, would be interested in working with you. You have plenty of land, and we have the expertise to give you excellent tax breaks.” He went on to detail the large tax deductions they were offering.

“Your timing couldn’t have been better,” said George. “My accountant has just told me that I need to consider ways to reduce my taxes. I have looked into conservation easements before, but the tax deductions that you propose are much better. Yes, I would be interested, very interested. Please call me back tomorrow.”

George had had a simple plan in amassing millions of acres of ranch land. He wished to keep it away from developers. This is just what conservation easements accomplished.

He also was feeling guilty about not properly figuring out how he was going to pass on his wealth to his family. If he could pay less in tax, he would have more to pass on to his wife and children. This thought gave him pleasure.

George marveled at his good fortune to receive such an opportune call. Was it too good to be true?

Conclusion
In our next video, we meet Jack Newcastle, an attorney for the IRS. Jack is currently conducting an audit of the very company that George Allbirght is considering using. Will George become just another victim of an IRS tax audit?

If you found this video useful, please give us a Like, and click on the Subscribe button below. We look forward to connecting with you in Part Two of our Tax Shield story.

To learn how the wealthiest families in the world conduct their financial affairs, please call +1 530 692 1007, or email us at info@expandedworldwideplanning.com.

At your convenience, we can arrange a call to discuss how our unique blueprint can vastly enhance your asset structure.
Disclaimer
The opinions expressed in this video are for general informational purposes only and are not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual on any financial structure, investment, or insurance product.

by Michael Malloy, CLU TEP RFC.
CEO, Founder @EWP Financial

The EWP Stories Video Series – CRYPTO-PPLI and EWP – Episode 1

Posted on by

Cryptocurrency, Private Placement Life Insurance and Expanded Worldwide Planning

The EWP Stories Video Series

Video 1

Celebrating a happy ending and a new great beginning we want to introduce you to a fresh Video Series

Welcome. The blockchain concept has given birth to crypto currencies. This is a relatively new phenomena in our lives. Yet taxes have been with us since early dynastic Egypt and probably before. Recently passed tax legislation in the U.S. is a cause of concern for all those who hold crypto currencies. Similar laws are being passed by governments throughout the world. For this recent U.S. tax legislation, we include below excerpts from Robert W. Wood’s excellent article in the Cointelegraph.

What most of you don’t know is that there is a simple and straightforward solution to these new taxes that has existed since the 1980s. The beauty of this solution is that it is asset neutral, meaning even though crypto currencies are a new asset class, this solution wholeheartedly welcomes crypto currencies. For this solution, crypto currencies are handled the same as any common asset class like stocks, bonds, and real estate.

What is this simple and straightforward solution to the grave tax problem that is facing crypto currencies: Private Placement Life Insurance, or PPLI for short. But not just any PPLI policy. The solution is a PPLI policy that is structured to embody the six principles of Expanded Worldwide Planning, or EWP for short. Our firm, EWP Financial, was an early adopter of this powerful yet conservation asset structure.

This series of videos will give you the basic principles of a properly designed EWP asset structure. An EWP asset structure is the perfect solution to the recently introduced tax legislation in the United States that threatens to wipe out a good portion of your gains in crypto currencies. An EWP asset structure is equally effective if you are a tax payer in a country outside the U.S. In this video, Part One, we introduce you to EWP Financial and our unique approach to asset structuring.

by Michael Malloy, CLU TEP RFC.
CEO, Founder @EWP Financial

The EWP Stories Video Series – Part 2 – Episode 4 – Asset Protection 4

Posted on by

ASSET PROTECTION 4 – Episode 4 – Part 2 – The EWP Stories Video Series

Introduction

Welcome. This video completes the devastating picture of poor asset planning embarked upon by Janice Johanson. In the end, Janice becomes painfully aware of her dreadful mistakes, and vows to protect her future business venture with an asset protection structure using Expanded Worldwide Planning, or EWP for short.

You don’t need complicated and convoluted trusts for rock-solid asset protection. In this video, we learn that Janice could have chosen an EWP asset structure, if she had taken some time to work with her advisor, rather than have this same advisor use a flimsy captive insurance company that eventually failed. Please learn from Janice’s mistakes, and take a simple, straightforward approach to asset protection–an EWP asset structure.

Janice saw the huge, fluttering flags outside the Four Seasons Hotel a block away as she walked west down 57th Street in New York City. She was going to meet Brian. It would be his last billable time meeting with her. Janice did not like letting advisors go, but in their last phone call Brian had almost fired himself. He did not condone his shotty legal work or excuse himself in any way. In a sense, this made it more difficult to let him go. She thought him a rare gentleman.

The bar nearest to the lobby was being remodeled, so they had to meet in the one to the rear of the check-in counter. She did not like the dark lighting, but thought the high mirror that reflected the myriad bottles of liquor a good design. It multiplied the bottles, which is just what she needed. An unknown factor to multiple her funds to pay for the future legal settlement resulting from the accident at her store.

To prepare for this meeting with Brian, she had researched the most likely worst case settlement for the accident. Her online research revealed she could be responsible for Steve’s future earnings as a heart surgeon, medical expenses, plus a large pain and suffering award. Her $100M was at all at risk.

After small talk about her trip to Switzerland, Brian mentioned that she could have done some planning for asset protection that might have protected her $100M from the sale of her business. She remembers Bian mentioning this in the past, but was so focused on growing her business, she always told him to bring it up some time later.

Since returning from Switzerland, she had alternated between anger at her plight and admonishing herself for engaging in ‘what ifs.’ Had the final papers for the sale of her business been concluded, her store accident would have been the new owners problem. Accidents rarely occur at the right time. The final signing occurred two weeks after the accident.

She purposely wore low heels today, so she could walk in Central Park after her meeting. She knew Central Park well and headed to North Wood, one of the most wild and untamed parts of this magnificent tribute to landscape architecture. Walking in the North Wood, Janice recalled her favorite hero in literature, Frodo Baggins of J. R. R. Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings.

Physically Frodo presented quite a contrast to this tall, slender athletic lady in her early 50s, but she reflected on the spirit of this short, squat, hairy footed creatur. It was a spirit of fierce determination to see a job through to the end, no matter what the cost.

So what was Janice’s plan for the future?

From her triathlon experiences, she was acquainted with the world of cycling, and the small bike shops where riders purchased their bikes and accessories. She knew that these bike shops were mostly small mom and pap type operations, and they missed out on the buying power of a large organization. With her wine shops she had built a large, well-run enterprise. Why not for bike shops? A nationwide chain?

It was a beginning. But she vowed to protect her newly hatched idea with an asset protection plan that would fully protect her. This definitely had to be part of her grand plan.

She emerged from the west side of Central Park and headed to 109th Street near Riverside Drive where her apartment lay. She would go for one of her favorite runs down the Hudson River toward Battery Park. If Frodo can deliver, so can I. Why not face the uncertain future in the same spirit that brought her to the top of the world. Stay on top, she told herself. Stay on top.

Conclusion

Our next video begins a new EWP story. This story will give you insightful information on how EWP provides the best tax shield available to protect your valuable assets. Our story details the failed attempts of George Allbright to use a conservation easement to ease his tax burden. George falls for a fraudulent sales pitch, which he mistakenly thinks will solve his problems. As our story unfolds, you will learn that this fraudulent scheme only compounds his problems.

If you found this video useful, please give us a Like, and click on the subscribe button below. We look forward to connecting with you in the next video.

To learn how the wealthiest families in the world conduct their financial affairs, please call +1 530 692 1007, or email us at info@expandedworldwideplanning.com.

At your convenience, we can arrange a call to discuss how our unique blueprint can vastly enhance your asset structure.

Disclaimer

by Michael Malloy, CLU TEP RFC.
CEO, Founder @EWP Financial